‘A new crackdown on immigration abuses was announced today by the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary as part of the government’s long-term economic plan to secure a better future for Britain.’
Full story

‘Paragraph 352D of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (1994) (HC 394), as amended and inserted, which provided for the grant of leave to enter to the “child of a parent” who had been admitted to the United Kingdom as a refugee, did not extend to a child for whom a family member had taken responsibility under the Islamic procedure of “kafala” and whose “adoption” did not fall within the meaning of paragraphs 6 and 309A of the Rules.’

‘Paragraph 120B of Appendix A to the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules did not require that an academic institution accepting students from abroad for continuing studies under the points based system should expressly state that a proposed course constituted academic progress. The mere issue of a certificate of acceptance for studies constituted an assertion to that effect.’

“In this two part article, Adreeja Chatterjee provides an introduction to the forced marriage legislation. This article explores the ‘typical’ forced marriage scenario, and how this compares to scenarios which crop up in the Court of Protection – where the mental capacity of the bride or groom is at the heart of the case. There is also an exploration of the case of [XCC v AA & Anor (Rev 3) [2012] EWHC 2183 (COP) (26 July 2012)] – a case in which Adreeja appeared in the first part of the litigation, and which merits close scrutiny.”

“The requirement, laid down under section 3(2) of the Immigration Act 1971, that rules affecting immigrants be laid before Parliament before they became lawful applied to rules which a migrant had to fulfil as a condition of his obtaining leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom and did not apply to rules which an educational establishment had to fulfil before it was entitled to sponsor students from outside the European Economic Area.”

“The UK Border Agency required colleges seeking highly trusted sponsor status to report all students who failed to enrol including those refused entry clearance or leave to remain. A refusal rate of 20% made proper allowance for unsuitable applicants who could not reasonably be weeded out by a college’s admissions staff.”

“Paragraph 352D of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules, concerning the entitlement to entry clearance of a child seeking entry into the United Kingdom as a de facto adopted child of a sponsor who had previously been granted asylum as a refugee, did not extend to children who, neither adopted de jure nor de facto within the ambit of paragraph 309A of the Rules, could be styled as ‘adopted’ by reason of having become a child of the family.”

“The suspension or withdrawal of a general (student) sponsor licence granted to a United Kingdom college to sponsor and enrol students from non-European Economic Area countries on point based immigration control, to study in the college, was not an infringement of the college’s Convention right to its possessions within the meaning of article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, so as to be protected under that article.”

“A sponsorship licence issued by the United Kingdom Border Agency to a business that was engaged in the provision of educational services to migrants from outside the European Economic Area constituted “possessions” within the meaning of article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”

“Family members who sought entry to the United Kingdom to join a sponsor who had been granted asylum but had subsequently obtained British citizenship still had to satisfy the rules dealing with applications to join a person who had been granted asylum and, therefore, they did not have to meet the maintenance and accommodation requirements imposed by the general rules relating to applications by family members.”

“Financial support provided by third parties could be taken into account when considering whether a person who was seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom to join a sponsoring relative could be maintained without recourse to public funds.”

“Where a person, in reliance, inter alia, upon art 3(2) of the Citizen Directive, sought to claim a right of entry and residence as a dependant of a Union citizen, there was no requirement to ask whether the claimed dependence arose from a need for the support of such a citizen.”

“The principle that support or funding from a third party could not be relied on by a prospective entrant to the United Kingdom under r 297(v) of the Immigration Rules (HC 395), where the entrant was a child of a parent or a relative settled here, was applicable to r 281, where the entrant was a spouse or partner, and r 317, where he was a parent, grandparent or other dependent relative of the person settled here.”

Sign up for the daily email

“It really is an excellent facility, and I already find it invaluable. It is particularly useful when I am out of chambers, in the UK or abroad, as it provides not only information but also all the hot-links I need.”